Discussion Dates: Friday 28th June to Friday 12th July
What would you rate this book out of 10 and why?
Jane: Disclaimer: I have not read this book, but since Mel encouraged us to answer some questions regardless, here I go!
Mel: Have answered all other questions and still not sure what to rate the book... I will go with 7/10 but reserve the right to change later once I have been persuaded that I actually loved or hated it...
Jaime: 7/10. I read alot of business literature and I am not convinced you can ever love any of it. You just take what you like from it and leave the rest.
Catherine: I am also finding it hard to rate this book. I'm giving it 6/10
Michelle: Just letting you know I'm halfway through the book so no rating just yet. However, regardless of what the book actually says, I'm tempted to rate it highly just because it has sparked such an important discussion.
Amy: I give it a 6/10 due to my interest in the subject matter but I'm not a fan of Sandbergs elitist views.
Lara: It is certainly a different book than what we have read to date and I think is trickier to rate, but I'd give it a 7 due to how much I enjoyed reading it and even more so, discussing the key points with others.
Nell: I would give it two different ratings: it is not very well written, so in that sense, I would give it a 5, but it is generating a necessary discussion, so in that sense, I would give it an 8.
2. Is this a book you wanted to read? Why? Why not?
Jane: I had no desire to read this book. I have read about and seen quite enough of Sheryl Sandberg. I cannot relate to her on any level, I think she is privileged and smug.
Mel: I was interested in the book, but did not choose it to read for book club. I was worried that Sandberg's view's could really alienate people and didn't think that this is the sort of book that you would find yourself surprising loving - which is always such a joy of book club. I think that people know before they read this book if it is "for them" or not. I thought that I would find sections of the book relevant to me and interesting, and other sections frustrating and condescending - and that is exactly what happened when I read it.
Jaime: I read it before the book club chose it actually. I wanted to read it because I think that Sheryl is an interesting case study of a woman who has gotten to a senior role in a male dominated industry and within a company that was known to be a bit of a boys club.
Catherine: I had never heard of the book and didn't know anything about it before it came up here. However I read it with great interest as it coincided with a period in my life where I was considering applying for a more senior level at my work which would also have meant going from part time to full time work. I can relate to what Jane is saying - that Sheryl's life is quite rarified in that it reflects the life of a very privileged few in the world but I tried to take from it what I could in terms of having confidence to put yourself forward.
Sharyn: My husband bought this book for me for my birthday earlier in the year. I wanted to read the book as I am interested in this topic. However, a part of me was reluctant to read it because I have been grappling with these issues since I had my first child three years ago and I thought that the book would make me feel bad / regretful about not 'leaning in' to my career right now. The book didn't actually make me feel this way. I didn't find Sandberg's views as controversial or extreme as the newspapers articles had suggested.
Michelle: Yes I absolutely wanted to read this book and was on the waitlist at the library long before it came up for bookclub (I only just got it, so that shows how popular it is right now). I also think it's great for bookclub as there are lots of different aspects an all-female club could discuss - for instance, reading below, I'm a bit shocked that not everyone considers themselves a feminist, REALLY?! I haven't read enough to decide whether I'm onboard with Sheryl Sandberg's ideas, but I do admire her for sticking her neck out, writing this book, trying to share her thoughts and kickstarting the discussion. She could have used her spare time to do something probably much more enjoyable in peace and privacy. For me she has sparked a lot of thoughts that I need time to digest, but I have loved reading your comments below.
Amy: Yes this is a book I wanted to read as like you Sharyn I have been grappling with these issues since the birth of my daughter 18 months ago. I resigned from my full time position in January this year as my employer was not able to offer me a part time position which was my preference. Most of the women I met through pre natal classes have returned to work since having their first child but most, if not all are struggling with the juggle and are not enjoying work due to the stress of the juggle...none are in Sandberg's privileged situation....it's always a topic of conversation.
Lara: From a personal perspective, I wanted to read this book as it is very relevant to my current situation (and my challenges in juggling are only going to get worse!). From a book club perspective, I was very interested to hear what such a talented and varied group of women would think and the debate it would generate....it seems to have done that at least!
Nell: Yes, I wanted to read the book. I just finished a 6-month long negotiation seminar for women, and this topic -- and book - came up a lot, so I was interested in reading it...my DC-based book club (suprisingly!) voted not to read it, so I am glad this group did!
3. Do you agree with Sandberg’s fundamental idea that women need to be urged to “Lean In”?
Mel: If the meaning of 'leaning in' is to throw yourself into life with all you have got then yes, I am all for it - but Sandberg is talking specifically about leaning in in the work place and I don't believe that women need to be told to do this. Women (and men) should do whatever they are passionate about and what makes them happy and healthy - working, not working, studying etc etc...
Jaime: Her message doesn't resonate with me because I do lean in. In fact sometimes I think I need to lean out! I have seen both men and women who don't lean in at the office so I am not entirely convinced that this is a gender issue but some of the other experiences she had and issues she discussed in the book really struck a chord. I have lived some, am living some and have seen most. Gender discrimination in big business in Australia is rarely overt but it is destructive and sadly women often contribute to our own undoing in the way we discuss female leaders - something that Julia Gillard's term has shown regardless of your politics - I have never been more disappointed when listening to Germain Greer talk about 'Julia's big arse'.
Catherine: I think that Sheryl underlined what we already know that discrimination on gender lines is real and works at all levels of seniority and power - as Jaime pointed out - it has hounded our first female Prime Minister. While I'm not sure that her message to 'lean in' will with resonate with a large proportion of women who don't share her circumstances, I don't think the message can do any harm and I have been encouraged by it. However, I agree with Jaime that I'm not sure that what Sheryl is addressing is a gender issue as people of all gender's lack confidence and need encouragement at times.
Sharyn: When you look at the lack of representation of women in senior positions in the government, corporate and professional sectors, it is clear that there are barriers to progression. There are many different kinds of barriers (discrimination, inflexible institutions and workplaces etc) but I agree that women contribute to the lack of progression by self selecting and not being as self promoting or as confident as men. I think that it is helpful for women to be conscious of the ways in which they may be holding themselves back and encouraged to lean in. At the same time, I would hate for this mantra about 'leaning in' to put more pressure on women than they are already under. I feel that women are already under huge pressure to 'do it all' - to be career high fliers, devoted mothers/wives/daughters/sisters/friends, gorgeous, fit, healthy, well dressed, well read, socially and politically aware/active and lead interesting lives - and I don't think it's possible to have all of that, let alone have it at the same time. I would also hate for this mantra to absolve governments from their own responsibility to ensure that laws adequately protect women from discrimination and to absolve institutions and corporations from their social responsibility to adopt more flexible work practices. The other concern I have about 'leaning in' is that it assumes that men will step back from their careers in order to let the woman move forward, which in my experience is not very common at all. This leads me to another concern: if both the male and the female in a relationship are 'leaning in' at the same time (which in my profession means spending huge amounts of time at/on work), what effect will this have on their children and is it beneficial for society as a whole to have generations of children who spend little quality time with their parents and are effectively raised by child minders who are not their parents?
Mel: Yes! Yes! and Yes! Sharyn. I agree with ALL your points and have been thinking about this exact issue/problem that Sandberg is possibly creating by assuming that all women have a partner who is prepared to lean into the family by dropping back their work commitments so that the woman can lean in at work. It strikes me as across the board unrealistic.
Catherine: This is where Sandberg's model is flawed (or should I say not applicable to most people) because it seemed to me that both her and her husband had pretty high powered careers and that the slack was picked up by nannies. This is not realistic for most people and there will need to be compromise. I agree with her advice to choose your partner well but for most of us, even with the most supportive of partners (and I am lucky enough to have one) there are still sacrifices to be made on both sides unless you can bring in a third party so that you can both do what you want. In my experience playing an 'equal role' doesn't mean that both partners get everything they want it means both partners make sacrifices equally.
Amy: If 'leaning in' in the workplace means confidently and boldly asking for what you want (that might be more flexible working hours that fit around your family), then yes I do agree that women need to be encouraged to 'lean in'. Jamie, maybe you need to write a book about 'Leaning Out'!! :)
Lara: Nicely put, Sharyn. I liked that Sandberg acknowledged a lot of the traditional barriers that still exist for women to succeed in the workplace, but admire her for daring to push forward the idea that women often hold themselves back and that we should at least realise that and address it. I don't think that Sandberg's perspective will resonate for everyone, but I do think it will make women (and also the men who read it - I have met a few already) think and discuss these issues and that is incredibly valuable. I do think that many women in particular do need to be encouraged to lean in, although I believe that there are times (as highlighted well in the article that Nell sent via email) where women may choose to step back in particular for family reasons and we need to support and respect that as well.
Nell: I thought that I would disagree with more of her messages before I read the book, but I found myself agreeing with a lot more than I thought I would. As an example, I agree that we shouldn't say no to an opportunity, just because we know we want to have kids in a couple years. My biggest disappointment in the book was that she didn't use her voice to advocate for more maternity leave and for taking as much time off, as possible, during the first year of your child's life. Women like her need to be a voice more more matnerity leave in the US, and - I bet - that would make it a lot easier for more women to "lean in" when they return.
4. Sandberg states, “The promise of equality is not the same as true equality”. Have you found examples of this in your own experience?
Jane: I think New Zealand has a pretty good history of gender equality. I know countless strong women who are driven, get what they want in their careers, have supportive partners who play an equal role in the home. I also know that they do not make a big deal of the fact that they are women. I think every man I know cooks, cleans, has an equal role in the parenting - and their wives do not expect anything less. But I have not worked in really corporate environments in New Zealand so I do not know if those environments value women and men equally. I am sure there are boys networks here, but I also know there are a lot of ladies in high positions in big companies.
Mel: It was quite fascinating to have read this book as the gender issue well and truly exploded in the Australia media, and finished it just before (the first Australian PM) Julia Gillard was removed from her position. In terms of my own experience, education is an area where women have a lot more equality in terms of participation rates and pay than in other industries, but still issues remain. Anecdotally, while there are so many more female teachers than male teachers, there are many more men in leadership positions. I am about to start back at work after an extended maternity leave and there is no way that I would be able to step back into the type of position that I left before having kids. I think though the point that Sandberg misses, or maybe she gets but just disagrees - is that I just don't care that I can't step back into a leadership role!
Jaime: I find your comments here really interesting Mel, I wonder how differently I would view this book if I had kids. I think that part of her point is that women could be better supported by their organisations to step back into their roles post maternity leave if that is what they desire. I never really read into it that she didn't understand women prioritising family if that is what they truly want. I think she is an advocate for options.
Mel: I don't believe that Sandberg is all about options Jaime, even though she claims she is. She is heavily pushing women taking on leadership positions in the workplace. To do this you have to be working full time. The majority of women I know who return to the workplace after maternity leave want to and do return on a part time basis. Even if better supported to work full time I just don't want to until the kids are at school full time. My views have been strongly influenced by a book Sharyn leant me a couple of years ago called "How not to F^&* them up" by Oliver James. The statistics that he gives of 0-3 year olds in full time child care for example, are polar opposite to those that Sandberg provides. While I do want to work, study, grow and change as a woman not just as a mother, Sandberg says that there is never a day/night/weekend when she is off-line for work purposes. If this is the expectation for women to take on serious leadership roles, then she can have it. I don't want it... for now. Maybe this will change when the boys are older...
Catherine: I think Sandberg does acknowledge that some women don't want leadership positions and want to prioritise family but when she does it comes across as tokenistic - like her editor suggested that it should be in there. I take all statistics around outcomes for children with a grain of salt because I believe we are all victims of 'confirmation bias' in this regard i.e. we will believe the statistics that support out position and discredit those that are contrary to what we already believe. I don't think any woman needs research to back up her choices as a mother. Every mother will do what she thinks is best for her and her family and as mothers and women I think we should support every woman's choices - so in that regard I support Sandberg's choices even though they would not be my choices.
5. Have you experienced situations in line with the 2011 McKinsey report that noted that men are typically promoted based on potential, while women are promoted based on past accomplishments? Why do you think this is the case? Sandberg advocates reaching for opportunities even if you don’t think you are quite ready – have you done this and when?
Mel: I found this statement very interesting and it made me reflect on people I know and workplaces that I have been involved in. Yes, I can see that this does happen and makes it very difficult for women - especially those who take time off to have children.
Jaime: Yes, without a doubt. I have been fortunate to be promoted on potential a few times but I recognise that I was very lucky. I think there is an issue here that goes further though - women are not likely to apply for jobs they don't feel 100% qualified for whereas men will. Why this is the case I am not sure but I see it in my friends and colleagues. Men can be more blindly self assured and women can be more reflective about their abilties and that can hold them back when men would go for it.
Sharyn: I have not experienced this kind of situation. What I have seen in my own working environment (corporate law firms) is that women's opportunity for promotion (i.e. partnership) coincides at exactly the time/age when they are having children. This creates a real dilemma because the first few years in these positions are extremely time consuming and pressured and a lot of women (like myself) are not willing to sacrifice the early years with their children and take on such positions. These partnership opportunities arise for men at the time they are first becoming parents, but they don't let their family situation get in the way and they just 'go for it'. So the men progress and the women lose these opportunities, which are as rare as hens teeth and fleeting opportunities. I don't think it's discriminatory, I just think that (generally speaking) women are wired differently to think more about what's in the best interests of their family.
Catherine: Sharyn's description completely resonates with me. Some of the most compelling statistics in the book for me was the number of highly educated women that drop out of the workforce when they have children. From a productivity perspective this is such a waste of resources and talent. It was interesting when Sandberg pointed out that when a woman is leaving work to have a baby everyone asks them about how long are they planning to take off and their return to work plan. But when a man's partner is having a baby - no one asks him these questions. I do think that facilitating women back into the workforce after having children is important - family friendly hours ( for men and women) and good quality childcare would see a lot of women enjoy work and motherhood. However, the culture of our companies and institutions are just not geared around these values so a huge amount of talent is lost and women who might enjoy some time in the workforce make decisions that see them out of the workforce for sometimes up to a decade.
Amy: I've not experienced this situation myself but know women who have. They believe point blank that due to the age and stage that they're in that the men have been the preferred promotional candidate. I've always been encouraged to set high goals and have definately reached for opportunities that I haven't quite felt ready for. The resulting experiences have been the most rewarding and challenging times of my career.
Lara: I have witnessed this multiple times and confess that especially at the start of my career I would only consider positions for which I really felt qualified. Young men in particular do tend to have a breezy self assurance that on one hand I admired, but on the other I thought was misguided and arrogant (and that it would eventually catch up with them). It did....sometimes, but not always. Now as I am more confident in my field, I am more willing to put myself forward for more opportunities, but of course, as many have stated above, this is coinciding with me having two young daughters and knowing that for me, the daughters have to come first. It is tough though because I have put so much into my working life and I want to continue to grow. Sometimes it's hard not to feel schizophrenic - when I am working I want to go full boar, but then when I am home, I realise I really just can't right now. I want to be successful at work, but being a good mother is top and I am not willing to get the full time nanny to make that possible at this time.
6. What did you think of the Flynn & Anderson study that supports the theory that success and likeability are positively correlated for men and negatively correlated for women? Had you heard this before? Why is “ambitious” often a derogatory word when used in reference to a woman but not a man? Have you seen examples of where powerful and successful women downplay their success in order to appear more likeable? Have you seen examples where they don’t and yet are still successful?
Jaime: I had heard it before and I find this the most compelling illustration of the differing corporate expectations of men and women in the workplace. I play down my ambition and success very often in the workplace. I smile more to build relationships and so that colleagues are not intimidated by my size (nearly 6 foot, size 16). As a woman I think that until you are in the C suite this is a necessity.
Sharyn: I have heard this before and completely agree. Like Jaime, I play down my success in order to be more likeable. I have been doing this ever since high school where it was not cool to be smart. I have always worked on the assumption that if you are smart, hardworking and competent, then people will recognise this and you will succeed. However, I have realised over time that this is simply not the case. My experience is in the corporate world where it is all about self promotion - if you don't blow your own trumpet then no-one will do it for you. Unfortunately I am terrible at this; it's just not in my nature! I have seen lots of examples where women do not downplay their success and whilst I admit that I find it jarring and confronting, it is certainly more effective in commanding respect, attention and influencing people than playing the nice girl. In fact, one of the most insightful books I have read in this area is titled "Nice girls don't get the corner office"!
Catherine: This also resonated strongly with me. In fact I am the mother of what might be described as a 'bossy' 7 year old girl. I don't like to see these demanding and bossy traits in my daughter and have tried to moderate them but this book has changed my attitude and now when I see my daughter being 'bossy' I tell myself that she is showing leadership qualities.......
Amy: I do know women that I both admire and respect that are successful, well liked and do not play down their successes. These women however all have their own businesses or are private consultants that demand self promotion. Personally I don't have a problem with an 'ambitious' person albeit a woman or a man. Rather it's the way in which their ambition influences the way they treat others in order to succeed. I would regard myself as an ambitious person and don't feel I've had to downplay any 'success' I've had. Perhaps this has been due to the nature of organisations (not for profit) that I've worked in. I've always felt privileged and proud of the role I've played in various community and aid projects.
Lara: This really struck a chord with me. I like to think I don't downplay my talents and speak my mind freely, but the reality is that I think women are inherently more conscious of what others think and they realise that this does make a difference to how they are perceived in the office and the opportunities they are often given. Women who are too direct or too strong or even too detail oriented are often respected, but sometimes get passed over for certain sales campaigns or positions. Where I work it is interesting. Although in retail there are a lot of women, in the software industry and in leadership positions in both, the majority are definitely male. While we have never had a woman General Manager, there are 3 women currently as part of the core senior executive team: 2 that run marketing and my boss, the head of strategy & solution marketing. Only 1 of these women have children and each of them have very different styles. If I look at former women role models in my organisation, most were the top earners in their family (the men stayed at home or had their own company), but the more forceful and direct woman was sidelined in the end and the other was well loved, but never said "no"...leading to a personal life that I don't want. I feel like there aren't that many examples of women successfully navigating to leadership roles who are still really family oriented. Of course, I have a cake-eater mentality - I want my cake and to eat it too (who doesn't?!)....but striking that balance is virtually impossible.
7. In the second chapter, Sandberg discusses the imposter syndrome: feeling like a fraud and fearing discovery. Have you ever felt this way? In what types of situations? Why do you think women tend to feel this way more than men?
Mel: No I have never felt like this, but I did see shades of myself on the bottom of p24 when she talks of the different fears that woman feel, especially the "holy trinity of fear: fear of being a bad mother/wife/daughter".
Jaime: I have felt like this when I have done jobs or projects that have stretched me.
Sharyn: I have felt like this when working on deals or matters where I feel out of my depth. I think that both men and women both experience this syndrome, but they deal with it in different ways. As a generalisation, I think men have greater belief and confidence in themselves and therefore can 'wing it' when necessary. By contrast, I think that women have to feel like they know everything about a particular topic before they can speak confidently about a matter. Perhaps this is because women are more likely to be perfectionists by nature. It really struck a chord when Sandberg was talking about the difference in attitude between her, her friend and her brother after taking the same exam. Like Sandberg and her friend, I have always underestimated my performance.
Amy: I've definately felt like this when I've seized opportunities that I haven't felt quite ready for. I know many men who also experience this and am not convinced that more women feel like this than men (when they're really honest!)
8. Sandberg has met quite a bit of criticism – much of it saying that it’s easy for her to tell women to lean in considering her rarefied background and seemingly unlimited resources. Do you agree? Do you think she effectively addresses this criticism in the book?
Mel: At times I got very frustrated with Sandberg's elitist attitude and huge generalizations. She does reek of upper-middle class affluence. But is that her fault? She can only talk about what she knows. Telling stories of girlfriends devising a test to see if a new boyfriend would support her career by inviting the guy to visit her for the weekend in Brazil, and if he did he was judged suitable boyfriend material just alienates so many women (myself included) based on the underlying affluence of everyone involved in this scenario. But I guess that sort of stuff is the reality of her life. Still, I think it should be have been edited out of the book. I also think that when she wades into giving marital advice that she is getting into very dangerous ground. I didn't read the book to hear about what sort of guy I should have married and how marrying the wrong kind of guy would be detrimental to my career. At least I am married (!!) - as according to Sandberg, if you don't marry and have children you will never reach the lofty heights of the CEO office. How horrifying for single women reading the book trying to gets tips on how to progress in their career to read that their career is going to go nowhere until they meet the perfect man and bang out a couple of perfect kids! I was turned off by this whole section. Question 13 will address this as well but clearly Sandberg has found the magical formula to parent without guilt, but as far as I'm concerned she does not pass this information on. I have come out none the wiser about how to loose the guilt about being away from my boys.
Jaime: I think that this is a marketing issue, in order to sell more books they have promoted it as being more that it is. The book should possibly be more squarely aimed women in or aspiring to business leadership positions although it is being read and promoted much more broadly. Some of the messages have a relevance that is further reaching but there is stuff in there that is going to alienate a lot of women. I am sorry to say that we have few women reaching the C Suite and they are likely to be from an affluent background or have become wealthy along the way. I don't resent her for this.
Sharyn: Sandberg acknowledges at the start of the book that there are a lot of women struggling just to make ends meet and take care of their families and that many women don't have the time, resources or inclination to lean in. Whilst she has obviously had a relatively privileged upbringing and therefore a head start in life, I don't feel that she should have to apologise for that. She's clearly worked her way up by studying hard, working hard and by being smart and competent. More to the point, she's got to where she is because she has been willing to make sacrifices along the way - e.g. taking only 3 months maternity leave, limited time with her kids and husband etc. She's stuck her neck out by advocating on behalf of women and while I don't necessarily agree with everything she says, I think in the long run it is beneficial to hear powerful women talking about these issues rather than pretending that gender doesn't matter. Like Mel, I found the section on finding the perfect partner to compliment your ambitions both impractical and unrealistic, not to mention unromantic!
Catherine: The big gender issues in society such as domestic violence (the most common cause of death in women under 40), sexual objectification, rape, female trafficking, cheap (mainly female) labour in sweat shops so we can buy a T-shirt at Target for $5 - are obviously not the topic of this book but I found myself wondering if the absence of a female toilet in the corner office of some New York executive suite (or wherever it was) was really an issue that I cared about. I don't think Sandberg has to apologise for her privileged position but I think she should acknowledge that as far as gender issues go, her issues while important are pretty marginal. However, I think that the more women there are in leadership positions, in particular in Government, then the more likely the broader gender issues will be addressed. So in that respect I think that her message is an important one.
And just so we know that progress is being made I will relay a tweet I read after the leadership spill in which Julia Gillard lost the Prime Ministership
Father to 5 year old son: We have a new Prime Minister
5 year old son: Who is she?
Lara: Nice tweet! I too felt that at times Sandberg's acknowledgements of alternative situations or points of views were a bit "token", but what if she hadn't acknowledged it at all? Then I think she would have been even more vilified. I think she honestly wants to reach out and be tolerant of others, but she can't change her background or who she is. I think she does a service to women in the end whether you agree with her or not, by simply advocating for women and taking a stand. It is because of her that we have had other articles with slightly different perspectives coming out like the Washington Post article. It is largely, but not completely because of her, that at BBQs, dinners, cocktail parties and other venues, women and men alike have been recently discussing women in leadership roles and that is huge.
9. Do you agree with her advice on negotiating? I.e. leverage the word “we” rather than “I”, be firm, but be as pleasant as possible. Do you think that is selling out or just pragmatic? She even states, “I understand the paradox of advising women to change the world by adhering to biased rules and expectations.” Do you think there is a better way?
Jane: I think using "we" in leveraging is ridiculous. In fact, it is a pet peeve of mine when people use we when they are talking about themselves. I also feel that advising to be firm but as pleasant as possible is just really basic... and I would say any woman who is in the position of negotiating would know this anyway. It doesn't not seem very groundbreaking to me.
Mel: I hated this whole "we" rather than "I" thing and felt that it went against the main thesis of her book.
Sharyn: Completely agree, Jane and Mel. It is pretentious and deceptive to tie your request for a promotion or pay rise to the plight of the feminist cause. What's wrong with asking for it because you think you deserve it?
Lara: Amen. My feeling was that this was too artful -- be strong and stand your ground (politely), but speak for yourself.
Nell: Agree! But, I also think we (!) need to do what it takes sometimes...
10. Did you like the jungle gym metaphor over the traditional ladder to describe career paths? Why?
Mel: Sure, this made sense to me - for both men and women. The days of a linear career path appear to be well and truly over.
Sharyn: The way that Sandberg described the concept of, and benefits of, a jungle gym made me feel a lot better about my decision last year to step out of the workplace for a while. I was pleasantly surprised that she endorses this concept because I had previously read articles which suggested that she was critical of women who work part-time, take time out of their careers and take their foot off the career pedal. I think the jungle gym metaphor is more realistic for women than a linear career path because it acknowledges that women tend to accept the greater responsibility for child rearing and care for elderly parents and that (I think) women have more diverse interests in life than work.
Catherine: The more I live the more I realise that almost nothing is linear - it's a messy world out there.
Lara: I've always liked the monkey bars. Frankly, this fits our world and my experience much better than a straight ladder.
Nell: Yup, it is so necessary - for both men and women.
11.Have you had a mentor on your career path? Was it a formal or informal relationship? Have you mentored others? How has it impacted on your overall career experience? How do you think it works best?
Mel: Not so much a mentor, but I do have two teachers who really influenced me and who I felt very close to and respected very much. One of them passed away recently and it was 20 years since I had seen her but I was/am so very sad by her passing that I think that I have only now truly realised after 12 years of teaching myself just how influential a great teacher can be.
Jaime: I have had a couple of mentors, both of them were my direct bosses. I have also mentored others. Rewarding relationships for all concerned.
Sharyn: I have not had any mentors, but interestingly, the people who have taken the most interest in my career have been men, not women. I think that an informal mentoring system works best because it is more natural and means that the individuals have a rapport and genuine interest in another. I have mentored others - they have all been females and (to be honest) people I probably saw aspects of myself in and therefore could relate to.
Mel: I would like to add that in the past couple of years I have really enjoyed and felt a sense of mentoring or rather 'life coaching' talking with Sharyn and Gen about work, women and work, the family/work dilemma etc.. I have especially enjoyed that we have done this and not lost our train of thought while chasing/ chastising/ feeling/ toileting/ laughing at busy little boys. I know that if I lived in the same spot as many others of you that feeling of camaraderie and support would be the same.
Nell: My mentor has really been my mom, and for that I am so grateful. I think it is so important, at least in my organizations, to have a "sponsor" or someone who is going to look out for you and help you get promoted. The fewer people we have sponsoring women, the fewer women who will get promoted. I think a sponsor is very different than a mentor, but really important.
.
12.In chapter 9, Sandberg discusses the myth of “having it all”. She highlights a poster at Facebook: “Done is better than perfect.” Have you had to change your attitudes in order to better balance your various commitments? Do you feel pressure to try to “have it all”? From yourself or others?
Jane: I do not believe that in this modern age, we can have it all. I think people (women and men included) are constantly being pulled in different directions, whether it be work, looking after young kids or older family members, the pressures of modern technology. I think that in this drive to be 'successful' it is the kids that are losing out. Main caregivers may not be even be the parents anymore, but rather nannies, or grandparents, or daycare workers. I also think that this concept of 'success' is completely warped. Success wholly relates to the amount of money and power one has, but to me, this is not success. Success, for me, is about raising a family where good values are being instilled and family members spend quality time with eachother. It has nothing to do with material wealth or reaching the top of a fortune 500 company. I feel sorry for women (or men) who make a decision to stay home and look after their children and are judged negatively for it, or feel like they are not part of a very career-driven society.
Mel: I'm not sure what 'having it all' is actually meant to encompass. What 'having it all' to me could be quite different to 'having it all' for another woman. I don't think that I can feel satisfied and calm and in control working and parenting and studying while my kids are little. I will always feel that I should be somewhere else, doing something else. I guess that I just need to learn to live with it and remind myself that it is just a passage of time. As for 'done is better than perfect' - I have subscribed to this for over 20 years. I would have probably done a lot better in my VCE and at uni if I had a bit more focus on perfect than just done!
Sharyn: I think women are under huge pressures to have and do it all. I wholeheartedly agree with Jane's sentiments. While I am grateful that I have many choices open to me as a woman, I find myself going round in circles deciding what is best to focus on. I have definitely changed my attitudes in order to balance my various responsibilities. Last year I made a decision to step off a defined career path, focus on family, expand my family and do some contract and volunteer work, which was a big step for me. As a result of this experience, I have learned to follow my gut instinct and do what feels right rather than what is expected. I have learned to take chances and trust that everything will turn out right in the end and have been pleasantly surprised that they have so far. In the workplace I am trying to care less about what others think (which is essential when you are working in a part time arrangement that your colleagues aren't happy about) and adopt the 'done is better than perfect' role. It's not easy to let go of old habits but it is quite liberating and I feel more relaxed and happier as a result.
Catherine: I am reminded of a quote that has stayed with me "there is one way to get everything you want and that is to want everything you get". While I don't earn the millions Sheryl Sandberg does I would still describe myself a privilaged - white, western, educated, with access to healthcare, recreation, and culture. What more is it reasonable to want in life?
Lara: I think having it all changes so much depending on what stage of life you are in because your priorities change. I am still juggling and trying to figure out the right balance, and to a certain extent probably always will be. I thought the "done is better than perfect" was a good reminder for me who often wants to do things 100% in every aspect and that simply isn't possible. Another motto that I have found to be very helpful is "if you don't ask, the answer is always no" -- this has helped me speak up when I otherwise might not have and it has proven to be really useful in pushing me to negotiate and ask for what I really want.
13. (The following question relates to those married with children) Sandberg and her husband have different viewpoints about parenting: She worries about taking too much time away from their kids, while he’s proud of the time he does spend with them. Have you found this to be true in your own relationships? Do you find that you have more guilt if you aren’t with your kids than your husband? Does your husband contribute equally to housework and childcare?
Jane: I am not married with children, but I feel very lucky in the fact that my father played a major role in parenting - he cooked, cleaned, and no job was a 'man's' or 'woman's' job in our household. My brother is exactly the same - there is no question about gender with him and his wife. Both of them just get on with work, housework, and raising the children.
Jaime: I have no kids either but I am always annoyed when hearing the men in the office say they are 'babysitting the kids' tonight - when their wife is going out for the evening.
Mel: It would be almost impossible for Ben to feel more guilt than I do, as I am constantly exploding with it. Guilt has never been an emotion that I felt a lot of until I was a mum. Right now I have a stomach bug and am in bed at 11.45am and Ben and my Dad are out with the kids. I feel SO guilty for being sick. Irrational but immovable. I do feel it less with Jack now that he is a bit older (4 in a few weeks) but with Gus I cannot let it go. I have just got my teaching timetable for August. Ben looks at it and says how lucky I am that only one day out of five do I have to work after 1.30pm. I look at it and just see all the mornings I have to work and how I can't take Gus to playgroup anymore and how that almost breaks my heart. I think Ben compares himself to so many other dad's we know who leave for work before the kids get up and return after they have gone to bed and feels really good about the fact that he is home, on average at 5.30pm every afternoon. And it is good and we are lucky. So yes, in a nutshell I do feel a lot more guilt and in no way does Sandberg help to ease it. Therapy session over!
Sharyn: For me, it is not so much feeling guilty about not spending enough time with my son when I work etc, as the fact that I don't want to miss out on anything. I think there are times when my husband is envious of my relationship with my son, but I am not sure that this equates to guilt or longing. My husband is a glass half full type of person and so he is very proud of the time he spends with our son. For example, he will come home and tell me that x asked him out for drinks after work but he chose to come home and spend time with us. When I decline invitations for the same reason, I don't even think to mention it and I certainly don't expect a medal! To be fair, my husband does the lion share of the cooking in our house and spends more time planning our social life than I do. I do the lion's share of the tidying, manage our admin life and organise our son's day to day life. Recently I went back to do some contract work after stepping out of work for 9 months and my husband made a lot of effort to accommodate my work by coming home early on the days I worked and attending our son's school functions and meetings. I think he finally realised how hard it had been for me going back to work after our son was born and was trying to remedy the situation. So we are getting there!
Catherine: My husband and I have a totally equal partnership. As far as my two daughters are concerned both mum and dad work, cook, wash, do school drop offs and pick ups, arrange play dates, buy and wrap birthday presents, get up at night to soothe, make lunches, clean the toilet and do the ponytails in mornings (although mine are a bit neater than his - I make sure I do them on school photos day). And if this group is representative it seems that there is a palpable shift in the traditional gender roles which our children will learn from us and therefore have different expectations of their partners in the future.
Lara: I will just say that I am fortunate to have a husband who does a lot of the housework (he doesn't let me iron - smart man!) and who doesn't expect me to have a perfect dinner on the table every night (good thing I have a Chinese, sushi, Indian and pizza on speed-dial). More importantly, he supports me working and has also been brillant about me taking a longer maternity leave this time around. However, when it comes to childcare, although he is a great dad, it is absolutely true that he doesn't feel the same level of guilt or responsibility to be there all the time that I do. Even this exact moment is a perfect example -- it was obvious that I wanted to finish these questions, but until I asked him specifically to watch our daughter and left the room, I would inevitably take the lead on caring for her (the other girl is snoozing). I know that I am lucky though, as he really does do a lot and I can count on him when I need it - sometimes I just have to ask more than I think I should.
Nell: I think in many ways Mike feels more guilty! I have arranged my schedule so I pick up my son every day and have dinner with him. Mike, to his credit, works so hard to be home to give Theodore a bath and to read him stories and put him to bed. He feels horrible when he can't make it home. I don't want him to feel guilty, but I love it when he walks in the door.
14.Sandberg talks about how the term “feminist” has taken on negative connotations. Do you consider yourself a feminist? Why?
Jane: I think the term 'feminist' can have certain negative connotations. I think I am a walking contradiction in terms of feminism. I quite like the idea of having a role in the home - being a mother, a nurturer, a homemaker (gasp!) but this would be in a perfect world where my partner also played a major part in the household. BUT I also feel disgusted when women are objectified. I am horrified at things like the 'babe of the day' Facebook pages. I also felt pretty horrified in a bookshop recently when I saw a children's sticker book - specifically aimed towards girls - that was all about 'creating a perfect wedding'. If this is what girls are aiming towards (i.e. getting married and creating a perfect wedding) then we have a serious problem on our hands.
Mel: Yes, I did see shades of myself when Sandberg talked about the negative connotations of feminism. On p143 she says: "It sounds like a joke - did you hear the one about the woman taking a feminist studies class who got angry when someone called her a feminist"? After 37 years on the face of the earth, all of them as a woman, I still can't articulate my thoughts on feminism, so instead I will quote the modern girls feminist oracle Caitlin Moran to tell you how I feel about the issue (just don't tell anyone this is how I feel!!!):
“We need to reclaim the word 'feminism'. We need the word 'feminism' back real bad. When statistics come in saying that only 29% of American women would describe themselves as feminist - and only 42% of British women - I used to think, What do you think feminism IS, ladies? What part of 'liberation for women' is not for you? Is it freedom to vote? The right not to be owned by the man you marry? The campaign for equal pay? 'Vogue' by Madonna? Jeans? Did all that good shit GET ON YOUR NERVES? Or were you just DRUNK AT THE TIME OF THE SURVEY?” - Caitlin Moran "How to be a Woman" “But, of course, you might be asking yourself, 'Am I a feminist? I might not be. I don't know! I still don't know what it is! I'm too knackered and confused to work it out. That curtain pole really still isn't up! I don't have time to work out if I am a women's libber! There seems to be a lot to it. WHAT DOES IT MEAN?' I understand. So here is the quick way of working out if you're a feminist. Put your hand in your pants.
a) Do you have a vagina? and b) Do you want to be in charge of it?If you said 'yes' to both, then congratulations! You're a feminist.” Jane: LOVE Caitlin Moran, Mel! THanks for this. Sharyn: I have always been proud to call myself a feminist and don't shy away from that term even though it has negative connotations for some. My simply definition of a feminist is someone who believes in the equality and advancement of women in society - I don't know many people who would disagree with that! Catherine: yes definately a feminist. Don't think it's complicated and not ashamed to say it. Mel: Can I start by saying that I was being tongue in cheek (not a good idea online) when I wrote re feminism: (just don't tell anyone this is how I feel!!!) I have been pondering this issue about the negative connotations of feminism for the past few days. Women that I respect so much - Cath, Sharyn, Michelle - all say that it has been easy for them to declare themselves a feminist from the day dot, so why do I find it difficult? I guess that I grew up believing like Sandberg that full equality had been achieved and that I had nothing to consider on this score. The work had been done, bras had been burned and of course I was equal to any male. Messages I received at both home and school reinforced this. It was only at university that I started to realize that perhaps the world was not as equal as I had imagined. I remember being annoyed in the early 90’s that the young Senator Natasha Stott-Despoja was more often in the news for her choice of foot wear than her take on policy, but I still didn’t think that gender issues had a lot to do with me. I remember thinking “but I like it when boys open doors, buy flowers etc.” I can’t be a feminist. I tried to read Germaine Greer but found her too angry, too unpleasant. So I put it all away and didn’t think about it for a while. But of course I want in and believe in equality for all women, and have found myself becoming more and more interested in reading about women’s issues, and feeling injustices acutely. So maybe I am indeed a feminist.. but it has just not come as simply to me as it has to others of you. Lara: Yes, I do. However, I think it is a real shame that there has been a negative connotation associated to the word itself. The basic principles of equality and advancement are fundamental and I think it is clear that we aren't yet equal to men in so many ways - equal pay for equal work just being one of them.
Nell: Not sure if this is really answering the question, but, like Mel, gender was a non-issue for me growing up. I started to get a glimpse of it in college. Now that I am a mom, as a senior manager at a big company, I realise that while my company has done many wonderful things about women and flexibility and retention, there is much to be done, and I need to have a bigger voice in facilitating these conversations. Younger women are looking at me to do so, and this book was helpful in making me realize how important it is that the conversation take place.
15.Do you have anything else you want to say about the book that wasn’t covered above?
Mel: Sandberg thinks that it is alright to explicitly discuss with women in the workplace if they intend on having children. She mentions that she knows employment lawyers would have a fit at this. So Sharyn - our employment lawyer - what do you think? Gen told me recently of a situation where this occurred to a colleague of her's. We both thought this was outrageous and sexist, so I was very interested to hear Sandberg's totally opposing view on this - and maybe she swayed me a little bit. What do other's think?
Jane: I think if the employer and employee were discussing it for the benefit of the woman's career (in terms of where she thought it might fit in terms of her own career path) it is fair and perhaps a helpful discussion to have, BUT if the employer was trying to get a feel for how long that particular person might stick around for (which is often the case), I think it is indeed outrageous and sexist. Does that make sense?
Catherine: Yes Jane, makes perfect sense. I think it would be difficult for an employer to ask the question without the latter assumption being made (i.e. that they were trying to figure out how long you would be around) I also think it would be really hard to ask the question without perhaps touching on some very sensitive issues ie. a woman may not want to have children. 2. she may get pregnant unintentionally. 3. she may have been trying heart-breakingly for years to get pregnant. It is a personal issue. Would you ask someone how their relationship was going because it may be disruptive to their work if they were to get divorced? This may be a really bad analogy but the point is, people are entitled to have a personal life.
And thank you everyone so far for a thoughtful and thought provoking discussion.
Lara: THANKS - this is one time I really wish we were all together drinking a glass or two of wine and discussing our different perspectives!
Jane: Disclaimer: I have not read this book, but since Mel encouraged us to answer some questions regardless, here I go!
Mel: Have answered all other questions and still not sure what to rate the book... I will go with 7/10 but reserve the right to change later once I have been persuaded that I actually loved or hated it...
Jaime: 7/10. I read alot of business literature and I am not convinced you can ever love any of it. You just take what you like from it and leave the rest.
Catherine: I am also finding it hard to rate this book. I'm giving it 6/10
Michelle: Just letting you know I'm halfway through the book so no rating just yet. However, regardless of what the book actually says, I'm tempted to rate it highly just because it has sparked such an important discussion.
Amy: I give it a 6/10 due to my interest in the subject matter but I'm not a fan of Sandbergs elitist views.
Lara: It is certainly a different book than what we have read to date and I think is trickier to rate, but I'd give it a 7 due to how much I enjoyed reading it and even more so, discussing the key points with others.
Nell: I would give it two different ratings: it is not very well written, so in that sense, I would give it a 5, but it is generating a necessary discussion, so in that sense, I would give it an 8.
2. Is this a book you wanted to read? Why? Why not?
Jane: I had no desire to read this book. I have read about and seen quite enough of Sheryl Sandberg. I cannot relate to her on any level, I think she is privileged and smug.
Mel: I was interested in the book, but did not choose it to read for book club. I was worried that Sandberg's view's could really alienate people and didn't think that this is the sort of book that you would find yourself surprising loving - which is always such a joy of book club. I think that people know before they read this book if it is "for them" or not. I thought that I would find sections of the book relevant to me and interesting, and other sections frustrating and condescending - and that is exactly what happened when I read it.
Jaime: I read it before the book club chose it actually. I wanted to read it because I think that Sheryl is an interesting case study of a woman who has gotten to a senior role in a male dominated industry and within a company that was known to be a bit of a boys club.
Catherine: I had never heard of the book and didn't know anything about it before it came up here. However I read it with great interest as it coincided with a period in my life where I was considering applying for a more senior level at my work which would also have meant going from part time to full time work. I can relate to what Jane is saying - that Sheryl's life is quite rarified in that it reflects the life of a very privileged few in the world but I tried to take from it what I could in terms of having confidence to put yourself forward.
Sharyn: My husband bought this book for me for my birthday earlier in the year. I wanted to read the book as I am interested in this topic. However, a part of me was reluctant to read it because I have been grappling with these issues since I had my first child three years ago and I thought that the book would make me feel bad / regretful about not 'leaning in' to my career right now. The book didn't actually make me feel this way. I didn't find Sandberg's views as controversial or extreme as the newspapers articles had suggested.
Michelle: Yes I absolutely wanted to read this book and was on the waitlist at the library long before it came up for bookclub (I only just got it, so that shows how popular it is right now). I also think it's great for bookclub as there are lots of different aspects an all-female club could discuss - for instance, reading below, I'm a bit shocked that not everyone considers themselves a feminist, REALLY?! I haven't read enough to decide whether I'm onboard with Sheryl Sandberg's ideas, but I do admire her for sticking her neck out, writing this book, trying to share her thoughts and kickstarting the discussion. She could have used her spare time to do something probably much more enjoyable in peace and privacy. For me she has sparked a lot of thoughts that I need time to digest, but I have loved reading your comments below.
Amy: Yes this is a book I wanted to read as like you Sharyn I have been grappling with these issues since the birth of my daughter 18 months ago. I resigned from my full time position in January this year as my employer was not able to offer me a part time position which was my preference. Most of the women I met through pre natal classes have returned to work since having their first child but most, if not all are struggling with the juggle and are not enjoying work due to the stress of the juggle...none are in Sandberg's privileged situation....it's always a topic of conversation.
Lara: From a personal perspective, I wanted to read this book as it is very relevant to my current situation (and my challenges in juggling are only going to get worse!). From a book club perspective, I was very interested to hear what such a talented and varied group of women would think and the debate it would generate....it seems to have done that at least!
Nell: Yes, I wanted to read the book. I just finished a 6-month long negotiation seminar for women, and this topic -- and book - came up a lot, so I was interested in reading it...my DC-based book club (suprisingly!) voted not to read it, so I am glad this group did!
Mel: If the meaning of 'leaning in' is to throw yourself into life with all you have got then yes, I am all for it - but Sandberg is talking specifically about leaning in in the work place and I don't believe that women need to be told to do this. Women (and men) should do whatever they are passionate about and what makes them happy and healthy - working, not working, studying etc etc...
Jaime: Her message doesn't resonate with me because I do lean in. In fact sometimes I think I need to lean out! I have seen both men and women who don't lean in at the office so I am not entirely convinced that this is a gender issue but some of the other experiences she had and issues she discussed in the book really struck a chord. I have lived some, am living some and have seen most. Gender discrimination in big business in Australia is rarely overt but it is destructive and sadly women often contribute to our own undoing in the way we discuss female leaders - something that Julia Gillard's term has shown regardless of your politics - I have never been more disappointed when listening to Germain Greer talk about 'Julia's big arse'.
Catherine: I think that Sheryl underlined what we already know that discrimination on gender lines is real and works at all levels of seniority and power - as Jaime pointed out - it has hounded our first female Prime Minister. While I'm not sure that her message to 'lean in' will with resonate with a large proportion of women who don't share her circumstances, I don't think the message can do any harm and I have been encouraged by it. However, I agree with Jaime that I'm not sure that what Sheryl is addressing is a gender issue as people of all gender's lack confidence and need encouragement at times.
Sharyn: When you look at the lack of representation of women in senior positions in the government, corporate and professional sectors, it is clear that there are barriers to progression. There are many different kinds of barriers (discrimination, inflexible institutions and workplaces etc) but I agree that women contribute to the lack of progression by self selecting and not being as self promoting or as confident as men. I think that it is helpful for women to be conscious of the ways in which they may be holding themselves back and encouraged to lean in. At the same time, I would hate for this mantra about 'leaning in' to put more pressure on women than they are already under. I feel that women are already under huge pressure to 'do it all' - to be career high fliers, devoted mothers/wives/daughters/sisters/friends, gorgeous, fit, healthy, well dressed, well read, socially and politically aware/active and lead interesting lives - and I don't think it's possible to have all of that, let alone have it at the same time. I would also hate for this mantra to absolve governments from their own responsibility to ensure that laws adequately protect women from discrimination and to absolve institutions and corporations from their social responsibility to adopt more flexible work practices. The other concern I have about 'leaning in' is that it assumes that men will step back from their careers in order to let the woman move forward, which in my experience is not very common at all. This leads me to another concern: if both the male and the female in a relationship are 'leaning in' at the same time (which in my profession means spending huge amounts of time at/on work), what effect will this have on their children and is it beneficial for society as a whole to have generations of children who spend little quality time with their parents and are effectively raised by child minders who are not their parents?
Mel: Yes! Yes! and Yes! Sharyn. I agree with ALL your points and have been thinking about this exact issue/problem that Sandberg is possibly creating by assuming that all women have a partner who is prepared to lean into the family by dropping back their work commitments so that the woman can lean in at work. It strikes me as across the board unrealistic.
Catherine: This is where Sandberg's model is flawed (or should I say not applicable to most people) because it seemed to me that both her and her husband had pretty high powered careers and that the slack was picked up by nannies. This is not realistic for most people and there will need to be compromise. I agree with her advice to choose your partner well but for most of us, even with the most supportive of partners (and I am lucky enough to have one) there are still sacrifices to be made on both sides unless you can bring in a third party so that you can both do what you want. In my experience playing an 'equal role' doesn't mean that both partners get everything they want it means both partners make sacrifices equally.
Amy: If 'leaning in' in the workplace means confidently and boldly asking for what you want (that might be more flexible working hours that fit around your family), then yes I do agree that women need to be encouraged to 'lean in'. Jamie, maybe you need to write a book about 'Leaning Out'!! :)
Lara: Nicely put, Sharyn. I liked that Sandberg acknowledged a lot of the traditional barriers that still exist for women to succeed in the workplace, but admire her for daring to push forward the idea that women often hold themselves back and that we should at least realise that and address it. I don't think that Sandberg's perspective will resonate for everyone, but I do think it will make women (and also the men who read it - I have met a few already) think and discuss these issues and that is incredibly valuable. I do think that many women in particular do need to be encouraged to lean in, although I believe that there are times (as highlighted well in the article that Nell sent via email) where women may choose to step back in particular for family reasons and we need to support and respect that as well.
Nell: I thought that I would disagree with more of her messages before I read the book, but I found myself agreeing with a lot more than I thought I would. As an example, I agree that we shouldn't say no to an opportunity, just because we know we want to have kids in a couple years. My biggest disappointment in the book was that she didn't use her voice to advocate for more maternity leave and for taking as much time off, as possible, during the first year of your child's life. Women like her need to be a voice more more matnerity leave in the US, and - I bet - that would make it a lot easier for more women to "lean in" when they return.
Jane: I think New Zealand has a pretty good history of gender equality. I know countless strong women who are driven, get what they want in their careers, have supportive partners who play an equal role in the home. I also know that they do not make a big deal of the fact that they are women. I think every man I know cooks, cleans, has an equal role in the parenting - and their wives do not expect anything less. But I have not worked in really corporate environments in New Zealand so I do not know if those environments value women and men equally. I am sure there are boys networks here, but I also know there are a lot of ladies in high positions in big companies.
Mel: It was quite fascinating to have read this book as the gender issue well and truly exploded in the Australia media, and finished it just before (the first Australian PM) Julia Gillard was removed from her position. In terms of my own experience, education is an area where women have a lot more equality in terms of participation rates and pay than in other industries, but still issues remain. Anecdotally, while there are so many more female teachers than male teachers, there are many more men in leadership positions. I am about to start back at work after an extended maternity leave and there is no way that I would be able to step back into the type of position that I left before having kids. I think though the point that Sandberg misses, or maybe she gets but just disagrees - is that I just don't care that I can't step back into a leadership role!
Jaime: I find your comments here really interesting Mel, I wonder how differently I would view this book if I had kids. I think that part of her point is that women could be better supported by their organisations to step back into their roles post maternity leave if that is what they desire. I never really read into it that she didn't understand women prioritising family if that is what they truly want. I think she is an advocate for options.
Mel: I don't believe that Sandberg is all about options Jaime, even though she claims she is. She is heavily pushing women taking on leadership positions in the workplace. To do this you have to be working full time. The majority of women I know who return to the workplace after maternity leave want to and do return on a part time basis. Even if better supported to work full time I just don't want to until the kids are at school full time. My views have been strongly influenced by a book Sharyn leant me a couple of years ago called "How not to F^&* them up" by Oliver James. The statistics that he gives of 0-3 year olds in full time child care for example, are polar opposite to those that Sandberg provides. While I do want to work, study, grow and change as a woman not just as a mother, Sandberg says that there is never a day/night/weekend when she is off-line for work purposes. If this is the expectation for women to take on serious leadership roles, then she can have it. I don't want it... for now. Maybe this will change when the boys are older...
Catherine: I think Sandberg does acknowledge that some women don't want leadership positions and want to prioritise family but when she does it comes across as tokenistic - like her editor suggested that it should be in there. I take all statistics around outcomes for children with a grain of salt because I believe we are all victims of 'confirmation bias' in this regard i.e. we will believe the statistics that support out position and discredit those that are contrary to what we already believe. I don't think any woman needs research to back up her choices as a mother. Every mother will do what she thinks is best for her and her family and as mothers and women I think we should support every woman's choices - so in that regard I support Sandberg's choices even though they would not be my choices.
Mel: I found this statement very interesting and it made me reflect on people I know and workplaces that I have been involved in. Yes, I can see that this does happen and makes it very difficult for women - especially those who take time off to have children.
Jaime: Yes, without a doubt. I have been fortunate to be promoted on potential a few times but I recognise that I was very lucky. I think there is an issue here that goes further though - women are not likely to apply for jobs they don't feel 100% qualified for whereas men will. Why this is the case I am not sure but I see it in my friends and colleagues. Men can be more blindly self assured and women can be more reflective about their abilties and that can hold them back when men would go for it.
Sharyn: I have not experienced this kind of situation. What I have seen in my own working environment (corporate law firms) is that women's opportunity for promotion (i.e. partnership) coincides at exactly the time/age when they are having children. This creates a real dilemma because the first few years in these positions are extremely time consuming and pressured and a lot of women (like myself) are not willing to sacrifice the early years with their children and take on such positions. These partnership opportunities arise for men at the time they are first becoming parents, but they don't let their family situation get in the way and they just 'go for it'. So the men progress and the women lose these opportunities, which are as rare as hens teeth and fleeting opportunities. I don't think it's discriminatory, I just think that (generally speaking) women are wired differently to think more about what's in the best interests of their family.
Catherine: Sharyn's description completely resonates with me. Some of the most compelling statistics in the book for me was the number of highly educated women that drop out of the workforce when they have children. From a productivity perspective this is such a waste of resources and talent. It was interesting when Sandberg pointed out that when a woman is leaving work to have a baby everyone asks them about how long are they planning to take off and their return to work plan. But when a man's partner is having a baby - no one asks him these questions. I do think that facilitating women back into the workforce after having children is important - family friendly hours ( for men and women) and good quality childcare would see a lot of women enjoy work and motherhood. However, the culture of our companies and institutions are just not geared around these values so a huge amount of talent is lost and women who might enjoy some time in the workforce make decisions that see them out of the workforce for sometimes up to a decade.
Amy: I've not experienced this situation myself but know women who have. They believe point blank that due to the age and stage that they're in that the men have been the preferred promotional candidate. I've always been encouraged to set high goals and have definately reached for opportunities that I haven't quite felt ready for. The resulting experiences have been the most rewarding and challenging times of my career.
Lara: I have witnessed this multiple times and confess that especially at the start of my career I would only consider positions for which I really felt qualified. Young men in particular do tend to have a breezy self assurance that on one hand I admired, but on the other I thought was misguided and arrogant (and that it would eventually catch up with them). It did....sometimes, but not always. Now as I am more confident in my field, I am more willing to put myself forward for more opportunities, but of course, as many have stated above, this is coinciding with me having two young daughters and knowing that for me, the daughters have to come first. It is tough though because I have put so much into my working life and I want to continue to grow. Sometimes it's hard not to feel schizophrenic - when I am working I want to go full boar, but then when I am home, I realise I really just can't right now. I want to be successful at work, but being a good mother is top and I am not willing to get the full time nanny to make that possible at this time.
Jaime: I had heard it before and I find this the most compelling illustration of the differing corporate expectations of men and women in the workplace. I play down my ambition and success very often in the workplace. I smile more to build relationships and so that colleagues are not intimidated by my size (nearly 6 foot, size 16). As a woman I think that until you are in the C suite this is a necessity.
Sharyn: I have heard this before and completely agree. Like Jaime, I play down my success in order to be more likeable. I have been doing this ever since high school where it was not cool to be smart. I have always worked on the assumption that if you are smart, hardworking and competent, then people will recognise this and you will succeed. However, I have realised over time that this is simply not the case. My experience is in the corporate world where it is all about self promotion - if you don't blow your own trumpet then no-one will do it for you. Unfortunately I am terrible at this; it's just not in my nature! I have seen lots of examples where women do not downplay their success and whilst I admit that I find it jarring and confronting, it is certainly more effective in commanding respect, attention and influencing people than playing the nice girl. In fact, one of the most insightful books I have read in this area is titled "Nice girls don't get the corner office"!
Catherine: This also resonated strongly with me. In fact I am the mother of what might be described as a 'bossy' 7 year old girl. I don't like to see these demanding and bossy traits in my daughter and have tried to moderate them but this book has changed my attitude and now when I see my daughter being 'bossy' I tell myself that she is showing leadership qualities.......
Amy: I do know women that I both admire and respect that are successful, well liked and do not play down their successes. These women however all have their own businesses or are private consultants that demand self promotion. Personally I don't have a problem with an 'ambitious' person albeit a woman or a man. Rather it's the way in which their ambition influences the way they treat others in order to succeed. I would regard myself as an ambitious person and don't feel I've had to downplay any 'success' I've had. Perhaps this has been due to the nature of organisations (not for profit) that I've worked in. I've always felt privileged and proud of the role I've played in various community and aid projects.
Lara: This really struck a chord with me. I like to think I don't downplay my talents and speak my mind freely, but the reality is that I think women are inherently more conscious of what others think and they realise that this does make a difference to how they are perceived in the office and the opportunities they are often given. Women who are too direct or too strong or even too detail oriented are often respected, but sometimes get passed over for certain sales campaigns or positions. Where I work it is interesting. Although in retail there are a lot of women, in the software industry and in leadership positions in both, the majority are definitely male. While we have never had a woman General Manager, there are 3 women currently as part of the core senior executive team: 2 that run marketing and my boss, the head of strategy & solution marketing. Only 1 of these women have children and each of them have very different styles. If I look at former women role models in my organisation, most were the top earners in their family (the men stayed at home or had their own company), but the more forceful and direct woman was sidelined in the end and the other was well loved, but never said "no"...leading to a personal life that I don't want. I feel like there aren't that many examples of women successfully navigating to leadership roles who are still really family oriented. Of course, I have a cake-eater mentality - I want my cake and to eat it too (who doesn't?!)....but striking that balance is virtually impossible.
Mel: No I have never felt like this, but I did see shades of myself on the bottom of p24 when she talks of the different fears that woman feel, especially the "holy trinity of fear: fear of being a bad mother/wife/daughter".
Jaime: I have felt like this when I have done jobs or projects that have stretched me.
Sharyn: I have felt like this when working on deals or matters where I feel out of my depth. I think that both men and women both experience this syndrome, but they deal with it in different ways. As a generalisation, I think men have greater belief and confidence in themselves and therefore can 'wing it' when necessary. By contrast, I think that women have to feel like they know everything about a particular topic before they can speak confidently about a matter. Perhaps this is because women are more likely to be perfectionists by nature. It really struck a chord when Sandberg was talking about the difference in attitude between her, her friend and her brother after taking the same exam. Like Sandberg and her friend, I have always underestimated my performance.
Amy: I've definately felt like this when I've seized opportunities that I haven't felt quite ready for. I know many men who also experience this and am not convinced that more women feel like this than men (when they're really honest!)
Mel: At times I got very frustrated with Sandberg's elitist attitude and huge generalizations. She does reek of upper-middle class affluence. But is that her fault? She can only talk about what she knows. Telling stories of girlfriends devising a test to see if a new boyfriend would support her career by inviting the guy to visit her for the weekend in Brazil, and if he did he was judged suitable boyfriend material just alienates so many women (myself included) based on the underlying affluence of everyone involved in this scenario. But I guess that sort of stuff is the reality of her life. Still, I think it should be have been edited out of the book. I also think that when she wades into giving marital advice that she is getting into very dangerous ground. I didn't read the book to hear about what sort of guy I should have married and how marrying the wrong kind of guy would be detrimental to my career. At least I am married (!!) - as according to Sandberg, if you don't marry and have children you will never reach the lofty heights of the CEO office. How horrifying for single women reading the book trying to gets tips on how to progress in their career to read that their career is going to go nowhere until they meet the perfect man and bang out a couple of perfect kids! I was turned off by this whole section. Question 13 will address this as well but clearly Sandberg has found the magical formula to parent without guilt, but as far as I'm concerned she does not pass this information on. I have come out none the wiser about how to loose the guilt about being away from my boys.
Jaime: I think that this is a marketing issue, in order to sell more books they have promoted it as being more that it is. The book should possibly be more squarely aimed women in or aspiring to business leadership positions although it is being read and promoted much more broadly. Some of the messages have a relevance that is further reaching but there is stuff in there that is going to alienate a lot of women. I am sorry to say that we have few women reaching the C Suite and they are likely to be from an affluent background or have become wealthy along the way. I don't resent her for this.
Sharyn: Sandberg acknowledges at the start of the book that there are a lot of women struggling just to make ends meet and take care of their families and that many women don't have the time, resources or inclination to lean in. Whilst she has obviously had a relatively privileged upbringing and therefore a head start in life, I don't feel that she should have to apologise for that. She's clearly worked her way up by studying hard, working hard and by being smart and competent. More to the point, she's got to where she is because she has been willing to make sacrifices along the way - e.g. taking only 3 months maternity leave, limited time with her kids and husband etc. She's stuck her neck out by advocating on behalf of women and while I don't necessarily agree with everything she says, I think in the long run it is beneficial to hear powerful women talking about these issues rather than pretending that gender doesn't matter. Like Mel, I found the section on finding the perfect partner to compliment your ambitions both impractical and unrealistic, not to mention unromantic!
Catherine: The big gender issues in society such as domestic violence (the most common cause of death in women under 40), sexual objectification, rape, female trafficking, cheap (mainly female) labour in sweat shops so we can buy a T-shirt at Target for $5 - are obviously not the topic of this book but I found myself wondering if the absence of a female toilet in the corner office of some New York executive suite (or wherever it was) was really an issue that I cared about. I don't think Sandberg has to apologise for her privileged position but I think she should acknowledge that as far as gender issues go, her issues while important are pretty marginal. However, I think that the more women there are in leadership positions, in particular in Government, then the more likely the broader gender issues will be addressed. So in that respect I think that her message is an important one.
And just so we know that progress is being made I will relay a tweet I read after the leadership spill in which Julia Gillard lost the Prime Ministership
Father to 5 year old son: We have a new Prime Minister
5 year old son: Who is she?
Lara: Nice tweet! I too felt that at times Sandberg's acknowledgements of alternative situations or points of views were a bit "token", but what if she hadn't acknowledged it at all? Then I think she would have been even more vilified. I think she honestly wants to reach out and be tolerant of others, but she can't change her background or who she is. I think she does a service to women in the end whether you agree with her or not, by simply advocating for women and taking a stand. It is because of her that we have had other articles with slightly different perspectives coming out like the Washington Post article. It is largely, but not completely because of her, that at BBQs, dinners, cocktail parties and other venues, women and men alike have been recently discussing women in leadership roles and that is huge.
Jane: I think using "we" in leveraging is ridiculous. In fact, it is a pet peeve of mine when people use we when they are talking about themselves. I also feel that advising to be firm but as pleasant as possible is just really basic... and I would say any woman who is in the position of negotiating would know this anyway. It doesn't not seem very groundbreaking to me.
Mel: I hated this whole "we" rather than "I" thing and felt that it went against the main thesis of her book.
Sharyn: Completely agree, Jane and Mel. It is pretentious and deceptive to tie your request for a promotion or pay rise to the plight of the feminist cause. What's wrong with asking for it because you think you deserve it?
Lara: Amen. My feeling was that this was too artful -- be strong and stand your ground (politely), but speak for yourself.
Nell: Agree! But, I also think we (!) need to do what it takes sometimes...
Mel: Sure, this made sense to me - for both men and women. The days of a linear career path appear to be well and truly over.
Sharyn: The way that Sandberg described the concept of, and benefits of, a jungle gym made me feel a lot better about my decision last year to step out of the workplace for a while. I was pleasantly surprised that she endorses this concept because I had previously read articles which suggested that she was critical of women who work part-time, take time out of their careers and take their foot off the career pedal. I think the jungle gym metaphor is more realistic for women than a linear career path because it acknowledges that women tend to accept the greater responsibility for child rearing and care for elderly parents and that (I think) women have more diverse interests in life than work.
Catherine: The more I live the more I realise that almost nothing is linear - it's a messy world out there.
Lara: I've always liked the monkey bars. Frankly, this fits our world and my experience much better than a straight ladder.
Nell: Yup, it is so necessary - for both men and women.
11.Have you had a mentor on your career path? Was it a formal or informal relationship? Have you mentored others? How has it impacted on your overall career experience? How do you think it works best?
Mel: Not so much a mentor, but I do have two teachers who really influenced me and who I felt very close to and respected very much. One of them passed away recently and it was 20 years since I had seen her but I was/am so very sad by her passing that I think that I have only now truly realised after 12 years of teaching myself just how influential a great teacher can be.
Jaime: I have had a couple of mentors, both of them were my direct bosses. I have also mentored others. Rewarding relationships for all concerned.
Sharyn: I have not had any mentors, but interestingly, the people who have taken the most interest in my career have been men, not women. I think that an informal mentoring system works best because it is more natural and means that the individuals have a rapport and genuine interest in another. I have mentored others - they have all been females and (to be honest) people I probably saw aspects of myself in and therefore could relate to.
Mel: I would like to add that in the past couple of years I have really enjoyed and felt a sense of mentoring or rather 'life coaching' talking with Sharyn and Gen about work, women and work, the family/work dilemma etc.. I have especially enjoyed that we have done this and not lost our train of thought while chasing/ chastising/ feeling/ toileting/ laughing at busy little boys. I know that if I lived in the same spot as many others of you that feeling of camaraderie and support would be the same.
Nell: My mentor has really been my mom, and for that I am so grateful. I think it is so important, at least in my organizations, to have a "sponsor" or someone who is going to look out for you and help you get promoted. The fewer people we have sponsoring women, the fewer women who will get promoted. I think a sponsor is very different than a mentor, but really important.
.
12.In chapter 9, Sandberg discusses the myth of “having it all”. She highlights a poster at Facebook: “Done is better than perfect.” Have you had to change your attitudes in order to better balance your various commitments? Do you feel pressure to try to “have it all”? From yourself or others?
Jane: I do not believe that in this modern age, we can have it all. I think people (women and men included) are constantly being pulled in different directions, whether it be work, looking after young kids or older family members, the pressures of modern technology. I think that in this drive to be 'successful' it is the kids that are losing out. Main caregivers may not be even be the parents anymore, but rather nannies, or grandparents, or daycare workers. I also think that this concept of 'success' is completely warped. Success wholly relates to the amount of money and power one has, but to me, this is not success. Success, for me, is about raising a family where good values are being instilled and family members spend quality time with eachother. It has nothing to do with material wealth or reaching the top of a fortune 500 company. I feel sorry for women (or men) who make a decision to stay home and look after their children and are judged negatively for it, or feel like they are not part of a very career-driven society.
Mel: I'm not sure what 'having it all' is actually meant to encompass. What 'having it all' to me could be quite different to 'having it all' for another woman. I don't think that I can feel satisfied and calm and in control working and parenting and studying while my kids are little. I will always feel that I should be somewhere else, doing something else. I guess that I just need to learn to live with it and remind myself that it is just a passage of time. As for 'done is better than perfect' - I have subscribed to this for over 20 years. I would have probably done a lot better in my VCE and at uni if I had a bit more focus on perfect than just done!
Sharyn: I think women are under huge pressures to have and do it all. I wholeheartedly agree with Jane's sentiments. While I am grateful that I have many choices open to me as a woman, I find myself going round in circles deciding what is best to focus on. I have definitely changed my attitudes in order to balance my various responsibilities. Last year I made a decision to step off a defined career path, focus on family, expand my family and do some contract and volunteer work, which was a big step for me. As a result of this experience, I have learned to follow my gut instinct and do what feels right rather than what is expected. I have learned to take chances and trust that everything will turn out right in the end and have been pleasantly surprised that they have so far. In the workplace I am trying to care less about what others think (which is essential when you are working in a part time arrangement that your colleagues aren't happy about) and adopt the 'done is better than perfect' role. It's not easy to let go of old habits but it is quite liberating and I feel more relaxed and happier as a result.
Catherine: I am reminded of a quote that has stayed with me "there is one way to get everything you want and that is to want everything you get". While I don't earn the millions Sheryl Sandberg does I would still describe myself a privilaged - white, western, educated, with access to healthcare, recreation, and culture. What more is it reasonable to want in life?
Lara: I think having it all changes so much depending on what stage of life you are in because your priorities change. I am still juggling and trying to figure out the right balance, and to a certain extent probably always will be. I thought the "done is better than perfect" was a good reminder for me who often wants to do things 100% in every aspect and that simply isn't possible. Another motto that I have found to be very helpful is "if you don't ask, the answer is always no" -- this has helped me speak up when I otherwise might not have and it has proven to be really useful in pushing me to negotiate and ask for what I really want.
13. (The following question relates to those married with children) Sandberg and her husband have different viewpoints about parenting: She worries about taking too much time away from their kids, while he’s proud of the time he does spend with them. Have you found this to be true in your own relationships? Do you find that you have more guilt if you aren’t with your kids than your husband? Does your husband contribute equally to housework and childcare?
Jane: I am not married with children, but I feel very lucky in the fact that my father played a major role in parenting - he cooked, cleaned, and no job was a 'man's' or 'woman's' job in our household. My brother is exactly the same - there is no question about gender with him and his wife. Both of them just get on with work, housework, and raising the children.
Jaime: I have no kids either but I am always annoyed when hearing the men in the office say they are 'babysitting the kids' tonight - when their wife is going out for the evening.
Mel: It would be almost impossible for Ben to feel more guilt than I do, as I am constantly exploding with it. Guilt has never been an emotion that I felt a lot of until I was a mum. Right now I have a stomach bug and am in bed at 11.45am and Ben and my Dad are out with the kids. I feel SO guilty for being sick. Irrational but immovable. I do feel it less with Jack now that he is a bit older (4 in a few weeks) but with Gus I cannot let it go. I have just got my teaching timetable for August. Ben looks at it and says how lucky I am that only one day out of five do I have to work after 1.30pm. I look at it and just see all the mornings I have to work and how I can't take Gus to playgroup anymore and how that almost breaks my heart. I think Ben compares himself to so many other dad's we know who leave for work before the kids get up and return after they have gone to bed and feels really good about the fact that he is home, on average at 5.30pm every afternoon. And it is good and we are lucky. So yes, in a nutshell I do feel a lot more guilt and in no way does Sandberg help to ease it. Therapy session over!
Sharyn: For me, it is not so much feeling guilty about not spending enough time with my son when I work etc, as the fact that I don't want to miss out on anything. I think there are times when my husband is envious of my relationship with my son, but I am not sure that this equates to guilt or longing. My husband is a glass half full type of person and so he is very proud of the time he spends with our son. For example, he will come home and tell me that x asked him out for drinks after work but he chose to come home and spend time with us. When I decline invitations for the same reason, I don't even think to mention it and I certainly don't expect a medal! To be fair, my husband does the lion share of the cooking in our house and spends more time planning our social life than I do. I do the lion's share of the tidying, manage our admin life and organise our son's day to day life. Recently I went back to do some contract work after stepping out of work for 9 months and my husband made a lot of effort to accommodate my work by coming home early on the days I worked and attending our son's school functions and meetings. I think he finally realised how hard it had been for me going back to work after our son was born and was trying to remedy the situation. So we are getting there!
Catherine: My husband and I have a totally equal partnership. As far as my two daughters are concerned both mum and dad work, cook, wash, do school drop offs and pick ups, arrange play dates, buy and wrap birthday presents, get up at night to soothe, make lunches, clean the toilet and do the ponytails in mornings (although mine are a bit neater than his - I make sure I do them on school photos day). And if this group is representative it seems that there is a palpable shift in the traditional gender roles which our children will learn from us and therefore have different expectations of their partners in the future.
Lara: I will just say that I am fortunate to have a husband who does a lot of the housework (he doesn't let me iron - smart man!) and who doesn't expect me to have a perfect dinner on the table every night (good thing I have a Chinese, sushi, Indian and pizza on speed-dial). More importantly, he supports me working and has also been brillant about me taking a longer maternity leave this time around. However, when it comes to childcare, although he is a great dad, it is absolutely true that he doesn't feel the same level of guilt or responsibility to be there all the time that I do. Even this exact moment is a perfect example -- it was obvious that I wanted to finish these questions, but until I asked him specifically to watch our daughter and left the room, I would inevitably take the lead on caring for her (the other girl is snoozing). I know that I am lucky though, as he really does do a lot and I can count on him when I need it - sometimes I just have to ask more than I think I should.
Nell: I think in many ways Mike feels more guilty! I have arranged my schedule so I pick up my son every day and have dinner with him. Mike, to his credit, works so hard to be home to give Theodore a bath and to read him stories and put him to bed. He feels horrible when he can't make it home. I don't want him to feel guilty, but I love it when he walks in the door.
14.Sandberg talks about how the term “feminist” has taken on negative connotations. Do you consider yourself a feminist? Why?
Jane: I think the term 'feminist' can have certain negative connotations. I think I am a walking contradiction in terms of feminism. I quite like the idea of having a role in the home - being a mother, a nurturer, a homemaker (gasp!) but this would be in a perfect world where my partner also played a major part in the household. BUT I also feel disgusted when women are objectified. I am horrified at things like the 'babe of the day' Facebook pages. I also felt pretty horrified in a bookshop recently when I saw a children's sticker book - specifically aimed towards girls - that was all about 'creating a perfect wedding'. If this is what girls are aiming towards (i.e. getting married and creating a perfect wedding) then we have a serious problem on our hands.
Mel: Yes, I did see shades of myself when Sandberg talked about the negative connotations of feminism. On p143 she says: "It sounds like a joke - did you hear the one about the woman taking a feminist studies class who got angry when someone called her a feminist"? After 37 years on the face of the earth, all of them as a woman, I still can't articulate my thoughts on feminism, so instead I will quote the modern girls feminist oracle Caitlin Moran to tell you how I feel about the issue (just don't tell anyone this is how I feel!!!):
“We need to reclaim the word 'feminism'. We need the word 'feminism' back real bad. When statistics come in saying that only 29% of American women would describe themselves as feminist - and only 42% of British women - I used to think, What do you think feminism IS, ladies? What part of 'liberation for women' is not for you? Is it freedom to vote? The right not to be owned by the man you marry? The campaign for equal pay? 'Vogue' by Madonna? Jeans? Did all that good shit GET ON YOUR NERVES? Or were you just DRUNK AT THE TIME OF THE SURVEY?” - Caitlin Moran "How to be a Woman"
“But, of course, you might be asking yourself, 'Am I a feminist? I might not be. I don't know! I still don't know what it is! I'm too knackered and confused to work it out. That curtain pole really still isn't up! I don't have time to work out if I am a women's libber! There seems to be a lot to it. WHAT DOES IT MEAN?' I understand. So here is the quick way of working out if you're a feminist. Put your hand in your pants.
a) Do you have a vagina? and b) Do you want to be in charge of it?If you said 'yes' to both, then congratulations! You're a feminist.”
Jane: LOVE Caitlin Moran, Mel! THanks for this.
Sharyn: I have always been proud to call myself a feminist and don't shy away from that term even though it has negative connotations for some. My simply definition of a feminist is someone who believes in the equality and advancement of women in society - I don't know many people who would disagree with that!
Catherine: yes definately a feminist. Don't think it's complicated and not ashamed to say it.
Mel: Can I start by saying that I was being tongue in cheek (not a good idea online) when I wrote re feminism: (just don't tell anyone this is how I feel!!!) I have been pondering this issue about the negative connotations of feminism for the past few days. Women that I respect so much - Cath, Sharyn, Michelle - all say that it has been easy for them to declare themselves a feminist from the day dot, so why do I find it difficult? I guess that I grew up believing like Sandberg that full equality had been achieved and that I had nothing to consider on this score. The work had been done, bras had been burned and of course I was equal to any male. Messages I received at both home and school reinforced this. It was only at university that I started to realize that perhaps the world was not as equal as I had imagined. I remember being annoyed in the early 90’s that the young Senator Natasha Stott-Despoja was more often in the news for her choice of foot wear than her take on policy, but I still didn’t think that gender issues had a lot to do with me. I remember thinking “but I like it when boys open doors, buy flowers etc.” I can’t be a feminist. I tried to read Germaine Greer but found her too angry, too unpleasant. So I put it all away and didn’t think about it for a while. But of course I want in and believe in equality for all women, and have found myself becoming more and more interested in reading about women’s issues, and feeling injustices acutely. So maybe I am indeed a feminist.. but it has just not come as simply to me as it has to others of you.
Lara: Yes, I do. However, I think it is a real shame that there has been a negative connotation associated to the word itself. The basic principles of equality and advancement are fundamental and I think it is clear that we aren't yet equal to men in so many ways - equal pay for equal work just being one of them.
Nell: Not sure if this is really answering the question, but, like Mel, gender was a non-issue for me growing up. I started to get a glimpse of it in college. Now that I am a mom, as a senior manager at a big company, I realise that while my company has done many wonderful things about women and flexibility and retention, there is much to be done, and I need to have a bigger voice in facilitating these conversations. Younger women are looking at me to do so, and this book was helpful in making me realize how important it is that the conversation take place.
15.Do you have anything else you want to say about the book that wasn’t covered above?
Mel: Sandberg thinks that it is alright to explicitly discuss with women in the workplace if they intend on having children. She mentions that she knows employment lawyers would have a fit at this. So Sharyn - our employment lawyer - what do you think? Gen told me recently of a situation where this occurred to a colleague of her's. We both thought this was outrageous and sexist, so I was very interested to hear Sandberg's totally opposing view on this - and maybe she swayed me a little bit. What do other's think?
Jane: I think if the employer and employee were discussing it for the benefit of the woman's career (in terms of where she thought it might fit in terms of her own career path) it is fair and perhaps a helpful discussion to have, BUT if the employer was trying to get a feel for how long that particular person might stick around for (which is often the case), I think it is indeed outrageous and sexist. Does that make sense?
Catherine: Yes Jane, makes perfect sense. I think it would be difficult for an employer to ask the question without the latter assumption being made (i.e. that they were trying to figure out how long you would be around) I also think it would be really hard to ask the question without perhaps touching on some very sensitive issues ie. a woman may not want to have children. 2. she may get pregnant unintentionally. 3. she may have been trying heart-breakingly for years to get pregnant. It is a personal issue. Would you ask someone how their relationship was going because it may be disruptive to their work if they were to get divorced? This may be a really bad analogy but the point is, people are entitled to have a personal life.
And thank you everyone so far for a thoughtful and thought provoking discussion.
Lara: THANKS - this is one time I really wish we were all together drinking a glass or two of wine and discussing our different perspectives!